Re: [PATCH 1/1] d3dx9: Complete test for D3DXCreateSphere.

[Misha Koshelev]

> > +static DWORD compute_sphere_test_index_data(FLOAT radius, UINT slices, UINT stacks)
>
> I haven't really thought this through yet, but would it perhaps be
> simpler to calculate the faces a vertex is part of, instead of the
> other way around?

Please find attached the relevant data.

I do not see a way from this data to generate the faces a vertex is part of that would be simpler
than what I am doing for indices.

However, if you have any suggestions, I would very much appreciate them.

Thank you as always for your careful review of my patches.

Misha

[PATCH 1/1] d3dx9: Complete test for D3DXCreateSphere.

[Henri Verbeet]

2010/7/23 Misha Koshelev :
> Please find attached the relevant data.
>
> I do not see a way from this data to generate the faces a vertex is part of that would be simpler
> than what I am doing for indices.

Well, if you look at e.g. the data for slices 6, stacks 7, there
indices are certainly very regular:

vertex 0:
 [0 (0) 1 (0) 2 (0) 3 (0) 4 (0) 5 (0)]

vertex 1:
 [5 (1) 0 (2)] [16 (1) 17 (0)  6 (0)]
vertex 2:
 [0 (1) 1 (2)] [ 6 (1)  7 (0)  8 (0)]
vertex 3:
 [1 (1) 2 (2)] [ 8 (1)  9 (0) 10 (0)]
vertex 4:
 [2 (1) 3 (2)] [10 (1) 11 (0) 12 (0)]
vertex 5:
 [3 (1) 4 (2)] [12 (1) 13 (0) 14 (0)]
vertex 6:
 [4 (1) 5 (2)] [14 (1) 15 (0) 16 (0)]

vertex 7:
 [17 (1)  6 (2)  7 (2)] [28 (1) 29 (0) 18 (0)]
vertex 8:
 [ 7 (1)  8 (2)  9 (2)] [18 (1) 19 (0) 20 (0)]
vertex 9:
 [ 9 (1) 10 (2) 11 (2)] [20 (1) 21 (0) 22 (0)]
vertex 10:
 [11 (1) 12 (2) 13 (2)] [22 (1) 23 (0) 24 (0)]
vertex 11:
 [13 (1) 14 (2) 15 (2)] [24 (1) 25 (0) 26 (0)]
vertex 12:
 [15 (1) 16 (2) 17 (2)] [26 (1) 27 (0) 28 (0)]

[...]

vertex 25:
 [53 (1) 42 (2) 43 (2)] [64 (1) 65 (0) 54 (0)]
vertex 26:
 [43 (1) 44 (2) 45 (2)] [54 (1) 55 (0) 56 (0)]
vertex 27:
 [45 (1) 46 (2) 47 (2)] [56 (1) 57 (0) 58 (0)]
vertex 28:
 [47 (1) 48 (2) 49 (2)] [58 (1) 59 (0) 60 (0)]
vertex 29:
 [49 (1) 50 (2) 51 (2)] [60 (1) 61 (0) 62 (0)]
vertex 30:
 [51 (1) 52 (2) 53 (2)] [62 (1) 63 (0) 64 (0)]

vertex 31:
 [65 (1) 54 (2) 55 (2)] [71 (1) 66 (0)]
vertex 32:
 [55 (1) 56 (2) 57 (2)] [66 (1) 67 (0)]
vertex 33:
 [57 (1) 58 (2) 59 (2)] [67 (1) 68 (0)]
vertex 34:
 [59 (1) 60 (2) 61 (2)] [68 (1) 69 (0)]
vertex 35:
 [61 (1) 62 (2) 63 (2)] [69 (1) 70 (0)]
vertex 36:
 [63 (1) 64 (2) 65 (2)] [70 (1) 71 (0)]

vertex 37:
 [66 (2) 67 (2) 68 (2) 69 (2) 70 (2) 71 (2)]

Note that since these are rings, you should be looking at e.g. the "5
(1)" index for vertex 1 as "-1 % slices (1)", etc.